Hungry Britain

Wow! Depression works in mysterious ways cactus and it is impossible to generalise about the behaviour of sufferers.My OH exists on very little sleep and is a complete workacholic.

Food banks should not be necessary in a country as rich as this, roses. I hope it will not be long before we can do away with them forever.
I note the government is now saying it could bribe us with tax cuts before the next election. Give the money to those who need it; those who have had their benefits cut illegally; those who have been forced out of their homes and away from their support groups; and to the families of those who have died after having their benefits cut.
The fullfact link was for you, jingle, about the way benefits are classified.

It's all a mess isn't it?For years the general public has been shouting about abuse of the benefit system, now they are doing something about it, we don't like that either.Children should always come first, and certainly be fed at school as much as possible.Breakfast club is a very good idea. I remember children [from years ago] that were lucky to get so much as a cornflake at home, while others had cooked breakfasts prepared by Mothers.Making it an all inclusive club, is great, ditto free school dinners and anything else going, free school milk or juice and a mid morning biscuit perhaps.There always were and always will be feckless hopeless families, but the children should not suffer from hunger.However, measures have to be taken to make men in particular go to work.I thought that you could only turn down 3 jobs before benefits were stopped?It's also true that there are many areas where there is no work. It's also true that debts are not shameful like they used to be so nobody cares about owing vast amounts.It's also true that many people think the world owes them a living.It's true that some families are trying hard to make ends meet, and others won't ever even try.It's true that young people often have unfeasible expectations, and others have no expectations, and feel angry and hopeless.It's true to say that some people milk the system shamelessly
and others who really need help quite desperately fall foul of officialdom or because they tell the truth, do not receive any help.Nearly all the points that everyone has posted have some truth in them, and that's why it's all a mess.On top of that, because of the new regulations , anyone [almost] can walk into Britain and expect to be helped, or look for work.How will this situation ever be solved? However, yes, to return to the original post
food banks must continue, and I hope they will.

In response to earlier posts, no I don't have nets. I see my neighbours walking the dog but I fail to see why the woman goes with him, th eman is supposed to have a disability which of course may not be obvious but he does not need a woman around as he can obviously get about, she can get a job, after all if he was a single bloke he would have to manage alone.
As to the remarks about depression, I find it hard to believe they cannot get up in the morning, I said lol because I said who does like to get up in the morning, not me for sure but I have to. No I don't think its funny to have depression but I think its strange that 2 people I know who have it supposedly, have both been seen on the early bus to go out. Depression must only affect people when they are trying not to get a job, or when applying for DLA, maybe it goes away on a day the local team plays.
There are scroungers all around

Yes, I agree, Aka.

No one is suggesting we bring back workhouses or saying that everyone on benefits is a scrounger. There is a growing culture of 'entitlement' which pervades all walks of life these days, however, and the answer isn't throwing even more money at the problem (Gordon Brown's preferred option). I will suggest, again, that perhaps people should be expected to live within their means, whatever their income?

https://fullfact.org/economy/welfare_budget_public_spending-29886

GA not talking about benefit fraud. These people are not fraudulently claiming benefits, they are operating within the system that already exists and within the culture they have been brought up in.

(That is going back to grannyactivist' s post)

I don't think you can lump state pension in with other benefits. It is contribution based. ie We paid in for it.

Better known as 'sheep dip' Elegran. One size fits all (not).

And who draws the line? Who is wise enough to separate the sheep from the goats, without leaving some sheep unfed and some goats munching everything they can reach? To say to this one, "come" and he cometh, to this one "go" and he goeth? Who can set themselves up to know just what is best for each man woman and child under their jurisdiction?

Only those arrogant enough to think that their judgment is absoluite, that everyone can be stretched to fit the Procrustean bed, or their feet lopped off if they are too tall.

Heaven save us from those with universal answers to complex problems.

It would be far too judgemental to draw any sort of line, granjura!

where do you draw the line ?

And

'Judge not that ye be not judged'.

Reading through this thread brings to mind another quote from St Luke.

'And, standing by himself the Pharisee said 'Oh God, I thank thee that I am not as other men, greedy, dishonest, immoral - or like this tax collector'.

It would be instructive for some to read the rest of this parable.

Very good point Elegran.

But what about those parents who have not been "shown to not be responsible" and would use any benefit they were given sensibly and for the good of the whole family? Should they all be tarred with the same feckless brush and have their children's lives organised over their heads? Would that not make them feel inadequate as well as poor, and that they might as well not bother? Give a dog a bad name and you might as well hang him.

There is a fine line between help where needed and condescension. It takes sensitivity to tread it without stamping on toes (or on the fingers of those who are hanging on grimly to their self-respect). Going in with all guns blazing and informing them that they are doing it all wrong and should let the experts tell them the right way will produce either a class of meek sheep or a resentful mob building a guillotine ready for the Revolution.

Many people who seem to be referred to on here as undeserving poor are those who come from chaotic families with poor education and aspirations.
For this group getting themselves organised and having the skills and confidence to get a job, if there are any around, is very difficult. So many of these skills are unconsciously learnt at home by those lucky enough to have had decent parenting.

Then they need jobs to go to.

Giving Crewe as a local town there are many big distribution centers about 10 miles north near an M6 junction. However public transport to get there to do what is usually minimum wage shift work is non existent.
Outside of the town of Crewe it is a basically rural area.

When I moved "up north" I could not have travelled the eight miles to the town where I worked by public transport, there are about three buses a day which do not fit in with working hours.

Transport is a huge issue with job seeking. Then there needs to be more jobs.

In the last 26yrs Crewe has lost Rolls Royce car production and the "Crewe (railway) Works." This loss of skilled labour hit the town very badly.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crewe_Works

"At its height, Crewe Works employed over 20,000 people; in 2005 fewer than 1,000 remained on site, with a further 270 redundancies announced in November of that year, and more cutbacks or even closure possible."

This pattern of the loss of major industry has hit many areas of the country very hard, just look at the state of the former mining and steel making areas. Large scale unemployment has devastating effects on the the physical and mental health of individuals and communities.

Grannyactivist I do not thing that there is one person on this thread that would not deprive the needy of welfare.
However, when the general public Are funding this welfare, I do think that there should be some acknowledgement that in some instances to goodwill is being abused, especially when many of those contributing are struggling seriously themselves.

I have a close family member who has never worked, a true socialist, but has never contributed to the communal pot, knows the benefits system like a manual, lives rent free in sheltered accommodation now, new teeth, new glasses, holidays abroad etc.
Yet I am divorced, currently unemployed, have worked just about all of my working life, saved a little along the way towards my retirement and am now having to live on these savings because I am not quite old enough for the retirement pension and have just over the limit for benefits. Desperately need to see a dentist and wearing the same glasses for 10 years. Who is the -socialist?/idiot.

Overheard in cafe this morning - girl in possibly mid to late twenties "I'm thinking of looking for a part time job Mum". Mother (in horrified tones) "What do you want to do that for? You get enough in benefits don't you?" There is just no hope for some people.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to live within their means, grannyactivist. Families getting themselves into debt so they can have a certain lifestyle just causes more hardship in the long run.

I get annoyed when politicians talk about the percentage of public spending that is being used to fund benefits, but then include state pensions within that figure. I do not consider my pension, should I ever get one, as a benefit, it is a contributory system and I have paid into it. If and when I ever get my pension, and they keep moving the goalposts, I will not think of myself as a benefit claimant or recipient.

Also, while we are talking about cheating and fraud, our MPs set such a good example dont they? And slightly off tack; how dare Edwina Currie tell people how to run their lives, she slept with someone else's husband, or is adultery in the middle classes ok, but immoral in the 'benefit class'?

Of course not grannyactivist- but surely putting food on the table for the kids should come before the others? somehow?

To use an overworked politician's phrase, let me be clear on this: there are, without a doubt, a small percentage of benefit claimants whose claims are fraudulent. (The actual figure is less than 1%, or 0.8% to be exact.) So the remaining 99.2% of claimants are apparently regarded by some as having been given more than is necessary to maintain their households. (And just a reminder that state pensions are classed as benefits and account for 47% of all benefits paid.) Trawling through the posts it seems that what is being suggested is that poor people should not drink, smoke, buy good gifts for their children, buy large TV's, own a pet, drive a car etc., but should demonstrate by their lifestyles that they are in fact poor. Is that truly what is being advocated here?

What I don't understand is why some people seem to think that benefits would stretch to drugs, fags, big dogs, expensive adult toys, holidays in Benidorm (appalling taste these people have eh) and so on, even if food was done without altogether.

And I've got to ask. Is it possible to buy tvs these days that are not flat screen?